Macfarlane v. Davis

The appeal was allowed because the Court held that deceit requires proof of dishonest knowledge or recklessness as to falsity and that an honest belief in the truth of a representation defeats liability for deceit; further, amendments introducing new causes of action are not to be allowed where they produce unfair prejudice inconsistent with the pleaded issues.

Citation: (1910) 47 SCR 399
Parties: Appellant/defendant: Macfarlane; Respondent/plaintiff: Davis
Court: Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction: Canada
Judgment Date: 9 December 1910
Procedural Posture: Civil Appeal (sale of Land, Tort of Deceit) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of Saskatchewan; Judgment on Appeal Allowed With Costs
Outcome: Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of the Supreme Court of Saskatchewan reversed.
Legal Topics: Deceit, Misrepresentation, Honest Belief, Amendment of Pleadings, Adding New Cause of Action
Source Language: English

Sale of Land Tort Pleading Deceit Misrepresentation Honest Belief Amendment of Pleadings Adding New Cause of Action

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2

Parties

Macfarlane

Appellant/defendant

Davis

Respondent/plaintiff

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal (sale of Land, Tort of Deceit) / Appeal to Supreme Court of Canada From Supreme Court of Saskatchewan; Judgment on Appeal Allowed With Costs

Legal Issues

1 Whether an honest belief in the truth of a representation negates liability for deceit
2 Whether a pleading amendment adding a new cause of action was properly permitted

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed with costs; judgment of the Supreme Court of Saskatchewan reversed.

Orders

Appeal allowed with costs
Judgment of the Supreme Court of Saskatchewan reversed